Whether it's your first Bonnaroo or you’re a music festival veteran, we welcome you to Inforoo.
Here you'll find info about artists, rumors, camping tips, and the infamous Roo Clues. Have a look around then create an account and join in the fun. See you at Bonnaroo!!
What did you think of Abrams' response about that?
Allowing for other forms of ID (like college IDs) that work for that population to use seems completely reasonable to me.
Edit: Also - the compromise doesn't state "national" voter ID. Abrams is saying the idea is that using some form of identification that works for that particular area/community would be fine and just shouldn't be restricted by access.
Regardless, doubt enough Republicans sign on to get past the filibuster anyway.
The strategy here seems to be that Manchin wants to make massive concessions to the Republicans to prove that bipartisanship can still exist and there's no need to eliminate the filibuster. But you're probably right, he won't even be able to get there.
It appears to root back to the January 6 commission vote. In the leaked audio, "Manchin told the assembled donors that he needed help flipping a handful of Republicans from no to yes on the January 6 commission in order to strip the “far left” of their best argument against the filibuster."
Manchin wanted to use the commission vote as proof of bipartisanship, it seems. These concessions for the For the People Act seem like more typical political posturing than anything.
We're all beholden to Machin and Sinema compromising and bringing back the talking filibuster, so that the Republicans have to stand and talk for hours about how gerrymandering is good. This whole Manchin package feels like (hopefully) the last attempt to get some GOP votes before he reluctantly agrees to filibuster reform.
The voter ID thing isn’t ideal but it seems workable enough for me to be fine with it. Obviously, if one party weren’t actively destroying democracy I’d be a little less inclined to back the compromise
Post by potentpotables on Jun 17, 2021 13:27:12 GMT -5
A major problem with Voter ID laws is that it attempts to solve a problem that has no data to show it exists (voter fraud, people casting ballots on behalf of other people). I do think the Manchin proposal attempts to concede Voter ID in a fair, transparent way, as opposed to the famous example of the Black Belt in Alabama where they shut down DMV offices after making ID a requirement to vote. If you can federalize that problem and penalize states that try to restrict access, Voter ID becomes less of an issue. In my opinion.
And the Manchin proposal defining partisan gerrymandering and making it illegal is huge, that's a huge step forward to fixing problems.
You'd be giving the side trying to destroy democracy one of the main tools they've been seeking for doing that for a long time. And a national voter ID requirement sounds even worse than a true national ID. Remember who controls the Supreme Court for probably the rest of our lives.
You'd be giving the side trying to destroy democracy one of the main tools they've been seeking for doing that for a long time. And a national voter ID requirement sounds even worse than a true national ID. Remember who controls the Supreme Court for probably the rest of our lives.
I have faith in left/progressive organizing to get the message out and deter any negative effects voter ID would have on turnout (which is what the latest studies show happens - or at least that turnout hasn't declined with voter ID laws, possibly because of the organizing effort to get the message out).
Don't get me wrong, I don't love it, but voter suppression seems to be lower on the list of problems when compared to gerrymandering and states having power to overturn their own elections. Fixing gerrymandering can help with the other two, but the other two are possible largely due to gerrymandering.
I’m ready for Harris to get in there and tell us all our problems come from Russian bots.
To be fair though, Officer Harris won't be much better than Biden
she’s not much better but I’d rather her go ahead and have to run in 2024. If Biden somehow seeks a second term we are likely stuck with her as the nominee until 2032. Best case for Dems is four full terms with this ticket.. not happening but it could be 16 years before we get another shot at someone better. Lmao.
My roommate thinks that the DNC forced Biden to run with Kamala so they can kill him with covid and have her take total control to pass extreme left wing policies. He got really upset when I said that she’s not *that* left wing
A major problem with Voter ID laws is that it attempts to solve a problem that has no data to show it exists (voter fraud, people casting ballots on behalf of other people). I do think the Manchin proposal attempts to concede Voter ID in a fair, transparent way, as opposed to the famous example of the Black Belt in Alabama where they shut down DMV offices after making ID a requirement to vote. If you can federalize that problem and penalize states that try to restrict access, Voter ID becomes less of an issue. In my opinion.
And the Manchin proposal defining partisan gerrymandering and making it illegal is huge, that's a huge step forward to fixing problems.
I go back to, I'm all for photo ID vax cards needed to vote. Great compromise for everyone.
There are a number of people on the left and the right who are popular political commentators and they're basically just shitty people. Either just in it for the attention and/or massive grifters, or they're abusing people, or they don't actually believe what they're saying and will lead people into bad directions.
Lol I don't know full context here but love seeing Crowder be scared off camera when an actual debate opportunity comes up
That’s a long time thing with Sader and people on Twitter. I don’t think anyone actually cares about a debate. It’s more funny because everyone knows he’s a complete fraud dumbass.
Ohh, I forgot Saw was trying to have a debate with him at this stupidass Politicon thing and Crowder chickened out.
For my more politically minded friends, what does this really mean? Can this actually pass through something like reconciliation?
It still needed the 60 votes to even have the discussion. Sinema not even voting on party lines now just shows she is really liking being the one who can determine everyones fate.
I shudder to think of how short his actual time will be. My guess is half.
His mom's statements ENRAGED me, so I can only imagine how much they hurt George Floyd's family and friends. I love my son unconditionally, but if god forbid he did something reprehensible like that I would not be speaking in court on his behalf, let alone proclaiming his innocence. I'd visit and put some money on the books and be full of sadness and guilt forever, but that's it.